The unwinable "War on Drugs" (1 Viewer)

[americanwoman]

At one point in our history drugs were widely available and easily accessible. Due to pressure from political agendas against certain drugs, it has now become a war on drugs. What does that mean though to you? How can we even compete with a drug industry that takes in billions of dollars a year, yet we budget only millions to fight it?
To me it doesn't make sense to me to fight certain narcotics but let huge pharmaceutical companies manufacture whatever they want, pay off the FDA, and release these 'legal' drugs that are just as addictive as any common street drug. I see so many people I know hooked on drugs. Cocaine, meth, and heroin are common place in the USA and in every neighborhood. Drugs affect all races and classes alike, yet we look past it.
I see no reason why marijuana should be illlegal and other controlled substance such as alcohol legal. ****, a man can commit murder and get off sooner than someone carrying an ounce of marijuana. What is wrong with that picture? everything. As a society we need to rethink this 'war on drugs', that has become a laughable war we cannot win and it seems aren't even trying to win. Except for a few drug sweeps and maybe a handful of raids I have yet to see anything positive come out of this war on drugs. I can still walk down a certain street and get anything I want. It's a joke and it's on us.

 

[Iriemon]

At one point in our history drugs were widely available and easily accessible. Due to pressure from political agendas against certain drugs, it has now become a war on drugs. What does that mean though to you? How can we even compete with a drug industry that takes in billions of dollars a year, yet we budget only millions to fight it?

Actually, I believe the Govt spends several tens of billions each year on law enforcement, courts, and incarceration to fight the drug "war."

To me it doesn't make sense to me to fight certain narcotics but let huge pharmaceutical companies manufacture whatever they want, pay off the FDA, and release these 'legal' drugs that are just as addictive as any common street drug. I see so many people I know hooked on drugs. Cocaine, meth, and heroin are common place in the USA and in every neighborhood. Drugs affect all races and classes alike, yet we look past it.
I see no reason why marijuana should be illlegal and other controlled substance such as alcohol legal. ****, a man can commit murder and get off sooner than someone carrying an ounce of marijuana. What is wrong with that picture? everything. As a society we need to rethink this 'war on drugs', that has become a laughable war we cannot win and it seems aren't even trying to win. Except for a few drug sweeps and maybe a handful of raids I have yet to see anything positive come out of this war on drugs. I can still walk down a certain street and get anything I want. It's a joke and it's on us.

I agree it is an incredibly hypocritical and a huge waste of resources. But our Govt never seems to have a big problem with either of those factors.

 

[Ivan The Terrible]

I hate all forms of drugs. But I think they all should be legal... And taxed heavily!!

 

[massive_attack]

The war on drugs is indeed a total waste. No I don't think meth, cocaine and etc should be illegal. The only illegal drug I want legal is pot. And for the other ones send them to jail over night, maybe a day or two on the first offense. Then hit them with a BIG BIG fine.

Basically, come up with a better solution because this one STINKS !

 

[LaMidRighter]

At one point in our history drugs were widely available and easily accessible. Due to pressure from political agendas against certain drugs, it has now become a war on drugs. What does that mean though to you? How can we even compete with a drug industry that takes in billions of dollars a year, yet we budget only millions to fight it?
To me it doesn't make sense to me to fight certain narcotics but let huge pharmaceutical companies manufacture whatever they want, pay off the FDA, and release these 'legal' drugs that are just as addictive as any common street drug. I see so many people I know hooked on drugs. Cocaine, meth, and heroin are common place in the USA and in every neighborhood. Drugs affect all races and classes alike, yet we look past it.
I see no reason why marijuana should be illlegal and other controlled substance such as alcohol legal. ****, a man can commit murder and get off sooner than someone carrying an ounce of marijuana. What is wrong with that picture? everything. As a society we need to rethink this 'war on drugs', that has become a laughable war we cannot win and it seems aren't even trying to win. Except for a few drug sweeps and maybe a handful of raids I have yet to see anything positive come out of this war on drugs. I can still walk down a certain street and get anything I want. It's a joke and it's on us.

The war on drugs boils down to a war on basic economics. Since economics follow natural laws fighting this war is the same as fighting physics, mother nature, and other natural phenomenon. The reason I believe we can't win it is this: A supply of drugs would not exist without demand, laws against drugs force them to be of illicit use, meaning that the only way to satisfy the demand is to deal with it on the black market, which drives up the price by limiting the competition. Compounding the problem is the fact that demand is such that most of our prison inmates are drug users(last figure I saw was around 75%) the national average to house each prisoner is around 45k/Yr., add this toll to the price tag for military action and the problem becomes staggering. Interestingly enough, the brilliantroll: ) economic minds that continue this "war" either can't comprehend or ignore the fact that the more "progress" you make in eliminating the supply, the more the price goes up, and the more the "enemy" makes. Drug dealers aren't necessarily stupid, when you take one out, the other guy's business doubles because of competitive factors and the less product on the market, the more profit.
Point two: Some meds. such as Ritalin, Prozac, and Oxycontin have similar chemical formulas to illicit drugs such as Cocaine, Speed, and Heroin, these are maybe a molecule or two off, or different atomic weight but basically have a similar effect on the human body. Scary no!
point three: If we would fight a smarter war, we could win by embracing the economic factors and actually creating a tax base from those who chose to imbibe and putting the criminals out of business in one swoop.
Here's how we do it:
1) Treat Marijuana as Tobacco - Tax stamp on product, available to citizen's over the age of 18 readily at any nearby store. Now you have created a control and a way to steady supply and price.
2) Hard drugs - this is a little more complicated, but we can create "clinics" if you want to call them that, run by an addictive medicine specialist, who can do routine tests and physicals, set a fair market price, and control the environment of usage. This doctor can appropriately dose a patient and the lower price will have the added bonus of not only getting rid of the dealers, but will keep those with major problems from getting criminally desperate because of prohibitively expensive price.

 

[zymurgy]

Although unwinnable, it is completely necessary in a society that emphasizes collectivism.

There was once a time that drug laws weren't needed. Goverment wasn't in the business of keeping people fed and clothed so people that lived lifestyles that jeopardized basic requirements for life would quickly find the error in their ways or cease living.

That isn't true today. You aren't going to go hungry in America, regardless of what poor decisions you make. People don't learn of their mistakes and it reinforces the bad behavior for impressionable people looking on.

So no, we can't win the war. I don't think winning was ever really considered as obtainable. Instead, it was a necessary move for a society that has moved away from individualism and replaced it with collectivism.

 

[LaMidRighter]

Although unwinnable, it is completely necessary in a society that emphasizes collectivism.

There was once a time that drug laws weren't needed. Goverment wasn't in the business of keeping people fed and clothed so people that lived lifestyles that jeopardized basic requirements for life would quickly find the error in their ways or cease living.

That isn't true today. You aren't going to go hungry in America, regardless of what poor decisions you make. People don't learn of their mistakes and it reinforces the bad behavior for impressionable people looking on.

So no, we can't win the war. I don't think winning was ever really considered as obtainable. Instead, it was a necessary move for a society that has moved away from individualism and replaced it with collectivism.

Good point, so maybe we should start to make people more responsible for their own bad decisions while we're at it.

 

[zymurgy]

Good point, so maybe we should start to make people more responsible for their own bad decisions while we're at it.

absolutely.

But nobody is buying what we are selling.

You got politician A telling people about all the great social programs he is going to introduce and politican B telling people they should really find a free market solution for thier problems.

Then Politician A doesn't even need to pay for the programs. Instead they quietly raise the debt ceiling to 9 trillion dollars and hope a majority of people don't catch on to the game.

Politician B doesn't stand a chance.

 

[LaMidRighter]

absolutely.

But nobody is buying what we are selling.

You got politician A telling people about all the great social programs he is going to introduce and politican B telling people they should really find a free market solution for thier problems.

Then Politician A doesn't even need to pay for the programs. Instead they quietly raise the debt ceiling to 9 trillion dollars and hope a majority of people don't catch on to the game.

Politician B doesn't stand a chance.

Sad but true. This is why I blame the special interests lobby so much in this country. They allow politicians to ignore fundamental constitutional principles by creating short sided voting blocks and throwing kickbacks to kill any sort of conscience the politician might have. I have no problem with civil rights lobbies such as the NRA(which I agree with) and the ACLU(which I seldom agree with) and even the NAACP(which in my opinion has swung a little too much towards special interest, CORE and Project 21 are better.). If we could get rid of corruption and vote buying I believe that people would see what this country could really become........again.

 

[::Major_Baker::]

I hate all forms of drugs. But I think they all should be legal... And taxed heavily!!

Even alcohol? You hate that too?

Is this a conservative endorsing taxes?

 

[Spartacus FPV]

Instead, it was a necessary move for a society that has moved away from individualism and replaced it with collectivism.

WHAT? Collectivism is so the bane of individual liberty.

 

[zymurgy]

WHAT? Collectivism is so the bane of individual liberty.

Agreed. That doesn't mean the majority of todays populace embraces it, because they do.

 

[Ivan The Terrible]

::Major_Baker::,

Even alcohol? You hate that too?

Yes...

Is this a conservative endorsing taxes?

Yes...

 

[Jay R]

Actually I'd dispute whether a war on drugs is actually being conducted, it seems like a misnomer to me. A 'war' on the narcotics trade would imply wide ranging military action against the cartels and their bases, regardless of the nation states involved. Catching a handful of smugglers now and again while excessively persecuting the addict isn't a war in my perspective, its a placebo to keep the anti-drugs concern satisfied that the government is doing something without having to actually produce effective results. As long as there's a smuggling bust every once in a while, and a couple of dealers get shot every week then those who are opposed to or, more likely, fearful of narcotics are satisfied, and keep voting and paying their taxes.

 

[Joby]

That isn't true today. You aren't going to go hungry in America, regardless of what poor decisions you make. People don't learn of their mistakes and it reinforces the bad behavior for impressionable people looking on.

Before this welfare state, people were still working just to get booze or their fix of choice. And trust me, brown will kill you before natural selection does because you'll do anything to get it.

) Treat Marijuana as Tobacco - Tax stamp on product, available to citizen's over the age of 18 readily at any nearby store. Now you have created a control and a way to steady supply and price.

Therein lies the problem. Marijuana, unlike tobacco, would be nearly impossible to tax. It would still be grown on the "black" market, but a dealer could claim they were distributing pipe weed sold legally. Or a user could grow it themselves. Why do you thimk tobacco and booze are legal? Because moonshine isn't popular and it's not posible to grow tobbacco and make a profit if not on an obvious, taxable farm.

And yes. I want every 18 year old on their birthday to buy a pack of joints with their new freedom and drive around.

The war on drugs boils down to a war on basic economics. Since economics follow natural laws fighting this war is the same as fighting physics, mother nature, and other natural phenomenon. The reason I believe we can't win it is this: A supply of drugs would not exist without demand, laws against drugs force them to be of illicit use, meaning that the only way to satisfy the demand is to deal with it on the black market, which drives up the price by limiting the competition. Compounding the problem is the fact that demand is such that most of our prison inmates are drug users(last figure I saw was around 75%) the national average to house each prisoner is around 45k/Yr., add this toll to the price tag for military action and the problem becomes staggering. Interestingly enough, the brilliant( ) economic minds that continue this "war" either can't comprehend or ignore the fact that the more "progress" you make in eliminating the supply, the more the price goes up, and the more the "enemy" makes. Drug dealers aren't necessarily stupid, when you take one out, the other guy's business doubles because of competitive factors and the less product on the market, the more profit.

Yes, we can't win. Yes, the war on drugs is keeping millions of cops, judges, lawyers, wardens, and counsellors employed.


You all missed the point. To paraphrase Malcolm X, You can't get drugs without the governments permission. You can't get alcohol or gambling or prostitution without the governments permission. All those things are there to pacify you. Every time you break open the seal on a liquor bottle, it's a government seal you're breaking.

 

[zymurgy]

Before this welfare state, people were still working just to get booze or their fix of choice. And trust me, brown will kill you before natural selection does because you'll do anything to get it.

Sure, some people will continue to engage in wrecklesss behavior. Personal responsibility diminishes the effects however.

Yes, we can't win. Yes, the war on drugs is keeping millions of cops, judges, lawyers, wardens, and counsellors employed.


You all missed the point. To paraphrase Malcolm X, You can't get drugs without the governments permission. You can't get alcohol or gambling or prostitution without the governments permission. All those things are there to pacify you. Every time you break open the seal on a liquor bottle, it's a government seal you're breaking.

I produce my own alcohol and would continue to do so without goverment permission.

 

[LaMidRighter]

Actually I'd dispute whether a war on drugs is actually being conducted, it seems like a misnomer to me. A 'war' on the narcotics trade would imply wide ranging military action against the cartels and their bases, regardless of the nation states involved. Catching a handful of smugglers now and again while excessively persecuting the addict isn't a war in my perspective, its a placebo to keep the anti-drugs concern satisfied that the government is doing something without having to actually produce effective results. As long as there's a smuggling bust every once in a while, and a couple of dealers get shot every week then those who are opposed to or, more likely, fearful of narcotics are satisfied, and keep voting and paying their taxes.

It's actually more of a conflict, but we have troops committed to South America trying to root out drug lords.

 

[Iriemon]

It's actually more of a conflict, but we have troops committed to South America trying to root out drug lords.

We've been rooting them out for 35 years. But we'll get 'em any day now, I'm sure.